F 1391 
.S18 C4 
Copy 1 



DIFFICULTIES OF MAINTAINING THE 

DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS, 

1775-1777 



BY 



CHARLES E. CHAPMAN 



C MENT 

Reprint from The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, 
January, 1916, Volume XIX, No. 3 



Published by the Texas State Historical Association, Austin, Texas 



<;:j 



>k> 



DIFFICULTIES OF MAINTAINING THE DEPARTMENT 
OF SAN BLAS, 1775-1777 

CHARLES E. CHAPMAN 

In a recent article the writer endeavored to show how important 
the supply ships from San Bias were in maintaining the early 
Spanish settlements of Alta California, and how ably the viceroy 
of New Spain performed the difficnlt task of getting supplies and 
ships to the northern establishments in time to prevent abandon- 
ment of the province.^ The difficulties of Viceroy Bncarely and 
the precarious existence of the new colonies will be even better 
understood when it appears that maintenance of the Department 
of San Bias was in itself no small problem. The period covered 
by this article has been selected because it was long enough after 
the founding of the department to avoid the effect of abnormal 
conditions^, and also because it was before permanence of the Alta 
California settlements had become assured by development from 
within. First, however, a review of the department's history to 
1775 will be attempted.^ 

The founding of the Department of San Bias grew out of the 
need for a port as a base of supplies in conducting wars against 
the Seris of Sonora, but it would seem to have been associated 
from the outset in the mind of VisHador Galvez with conquests in 
the Californias as well. As early as December, 1767, we learn that 
Galvez was ardently at work on plans for formation of the depart- 
ment, having charged one Eivero with the duty of establishing a 
port there.^ The official objects of the department are stated in 
Aaceroy Croix's instruction of January 11, 1768, for settlement 

^Chapman, "The Alta California Supply Ships, 1773-76," in The Quae- 
TERLY, XIX, 184-94. "Alta California" is used, as also in the present 
article, for what is now California of the United States to distinguish 
the more clearly from Baja California of Mexico, or from "California" 
or "Californias," which formerly included both. Names of individuals 
appearing in this account have been identified for the most part, where 
they were important enough to require it, in the above article. 

^I have relied wholly on materials of the Archivo General de Indias 
(A. G. I.) of Seville, Spain. Copies of some of the documents used are 
now in the Academy of Pacific Coast History, Berkeley. 

»Rada to Arriaga, Dec. 27, 1767. A. G. I., Estado Aud. Mex. 1, Doc. 99. 



262 Tlic Soutliwestern Historical Quarterly 

of San Bias. After the measures necessary for pacification of 
Sonora and other frontier provinces should be taken, he said, it 
had been deemed indispensable to found a port for the advantage 
of boats employed on such expeditions and available for commerce 
with Sonora, and for the preservation and advancement of the 
Californias.* Galvez proceeded to San Bias in May, 1768, and 
established the department. Whatever place the Sonora wars may 
have had in the original plans, the Department of San Bias was 
to serve primarily as a base of supplies for maintaining the two 
Californias. The selection of San Bias for this purpose was open 
to objection, for the port was not a good one, and the site was un- 
healthful and not suited to either agriculture or stock-raising. 

Some idea of the nature and operations of the department may 
be gained by consulting the reglamento, or instrument of govern- 
ment;, for the Californias and San Bias of the 5rear 1773. The 
intimate relation of San Bias to Alta and Baja California is to be 
noted, for they were regarded as essentially an unit. The prin- 
pical document in the file which was eventually to become the 
reglamento (for no single document was drawn up embodying the 
results of deliberations to this end) was a recommendation of 
May 19, 1773, by Juan Jose de Echeveste, at that time purchas- 
ing agent for the Californias in ]\Iexico City, giving detailed sug- 
gestions as to what the reglamento should be. The document be- 
gins with an estimate of the number of men and cost per year of 
each of the Californias and San Bias. San Bias was considered 
under three heads: the department proper; the arsenal or ship- 
yard; and the fleet. The following men were needed: in the 
department proper, a commissary, an accountant {contador) , a 
paymaster and storekeeper, three scribes, an amanuensis, a chap- 
lain, and a sacristan; at the shipyard, a master- workman {maestro 
mayor), a cooper, a rope maker (corcliador) , and a boatswain; in 
the fleet: for the frigate, a captain and pilot, a second pilot, a 
boatswain, a boatswain's mate, a steward, a carpenter, a calker, 
two cabin boys, six steersmen, twenty-seven ship's boys (guru- 
metes), and thirty sailors; for each of two packet boats, a cap- 
tain and pilot, a second pilot, a boatswain, a boatswain's mate, a 
steward, a carpenter, a calker, two cabin boys, six steersmen, ten 

^A. G. L, 104-6-15. 

Qift 
Antbor 

DE5 !S t9^ 



Mainlaining the Department of San Bias, 1775-1777 263 

ship's boys, and sixteen sailors. The annual cost of the depart- 
ment proper was calculated at 8,691 pesos^ 4 tomines (or reales), 
6 granos, including rations for 137 men in the Calif ornias ;5 of 
the shipyard, at 12,355 pesos, 2 tomines, 6 granos, mostly for re- 
pairs to ships; and of the fleet, at 34,037 pesos, 5 tomines. Thus 
the total cost for San Bias would be over 55,000 pesos a year, 
with only three boats in service. As an offset, the salt mines of 
San Bias produced about 25,000 pesos a year. Besides the three 
ships provided for, which were to serve as supply ships, there were 
two other packet boats, one sloop, and a schooner in the depart- 
ment for which no funds were assigned. Echeveste recommended 
that very careful, detailed accounts should be kept at San Bias 
of goods shipped to the Californias.''^ A junta de giierra y real 
hacienda of July 8, 1773, sustained the recommendations of 
Echeveste that have been quoted here, but recommended sale of 
the extra four ships. Special notice was also taken of complaints 
received from Campo, an official at San Bias, that there were not 
enough funds on hand even to pay wages to the men,'' and the 
necessity was recognized for early despatch of money to San Bias 
to cover expenses for the rest of the year 1773.^ Bucarely's decree 
of July 23 amounted to an agreement with the junta until the 
king should decide upon a new reglamento. 

Additional duties were placed upon the department in connec- 
tion with Spanish voyages of exploration to the northwest to see 
whether the Eussians had formed establishments upon American 
soil. This called for more ships and men and officers. In a 
letter of July 27, 1773, Bucarely asked Arriaga to send some 
naval officers from Spain for use in the projected explorations.® 
Arriaga's reply of August 24 informed him that six were being 
sent.^° One voyage was made, however, before their arrival, that 

''Except for four nmleteers and the missionaries this number accounted 
for the entire Spanish establishments of the Californias. 

^In Testimonio del Reglamento Provisional, 1773, A. G. I., 104-6-16, 
Cuad. 2. 

Tampo's letters, dated January 27 and February 14, 1773, are in 
Testimonio de las representacioncs del Comisionado de 8. Bias, A. G. I., 
104-6-16, Cuad. 5. 

«In Ibid. 

"A. G. I., Estado, And. Mcx. 1, Doc. 1. 

^"Cited in Bucarely to Arriaga, Nov. 20, 1773. A. G. I., Estado, Aud. 
Mex. 1, Doe. 4. 



264 The Sotitli western Historical Quarterly 

of Perez in the frigate Santiago in 17'7-i. The burden placed upon 
San Bias was a heavy one. Bucarely expressed an opinion in his 
July 37 letter that voyages of exploration would cost less if con- 
ducted from ]\Ianila. Galvez suggested to Arriaga, December 18, 
1773, that the Manila galleon should be ordered to stop at Monterey 
on its voyage to Acapulco and leave goods for Alta California, a 
cheaper method, he believed, than by reliance upon San Bias." 
So great were the financial burdens of San Bias that one body, the 
Tribunal de Guentas (Tribunal of Accounts) of Mexico recom- 
mended that the department be done away with. This extreme 
\new called forth several protests, among others from Galvez, who 
characterized the suggestion as nonsensical, saying that the depart- 
ment was indispensable.^- One of the jDroblems in the use of San 
Bias was the great cost and labor involved in getting goods across 
Kew Spain to that port, owing to the width of the viceroyalty at 
that point and the difficulty of the route. It Avas virtually impos- 
sible to get artillery across New Spain to San Bias, necessitating 
recourse to Manila. This caused Bucarely to send one Agustin 
Crame to the Isthmus of Tehuantepec to see if a route might be 
found for transportation of artillery. Crame's expedition was a 
complete success. Writing of it to Arriaga, March 37, 1774, 
Bucarely remarked that the Tehuantepec route might be used for 
transportation not only of artillery but also of goods for Alta 
California and the ships employed in exploring voyages. It would 
cost less to send goods that Avay than it did by way of San Bias, 
and vrould take less time than it would if recourse were had to 
Manila.^'' Despite manifold objections to it, however, San Bias 
was to remain for many years the seat of the marine department 
for the northern shores of the Pacific coast of New Spain. We 
may now proceed a little more in detail to consider its difficulties 
in the years 1775-1777. 

The Perez voyage of 1774 to the far northwest was followed by 
voyages of Heceta and Bodega in 1775, while supply ships con- 
tinued as before to visit Alta and Baja California. It had been 
intended to follow up the 1775 voyages to the northwest with 
others, but even before the return of Heceta and Bodega it was 

"A. G. I., 104-3-4. 

^=Galvez to Arriaga, March 8, 1774, A. G. I., 104-6-16. 

"A. G. I., Estado, Aiul. Hex. 1, Doc. 9. 



Maintaining the Department of San Bias, 1775-1777 265 

clear that there were going to be difficulties. The Department of 
San Bias had exhausted its funds and had been obliged to borrow 
7,976 2^esos because of the expense involved in fitting out the 
1775 voyages, Bucarely more than made up the deficiency by 
remitting 20,000 pesos chargeable to explorations.^* A more seri- 
ous difficulty arose when the port of San Bias began to till in. 
Bucarely referred to this in a letter to Arriaga of June 26, 1775. 
The department might have to be moved to another port, he said.^^ 
On August 27, he wrote two letters to Arriaga on this subject. 
In one, he said that he had directed Miguel de Corral, a lieutenant 
colonel of engineers, to make soundings of San Bias and other 
ports in the vicinity.^" In the other, he said that he was suspend- 
ing decision about removal of the department from San Bias, 
until he should hear whether any Eussian establishments had been 
found upon the northwest coasts, in which case he implied that 
a better port than San Bias would be necessary. If no more should 
be required than to send supplies to Alta California, San Bias 
Avould answer the purpose.^'^ The scant depth of the port of 
San Bias continued to give trouble, however. On July 27, 1776^; 
we find Bucarely writing to Galvez, who had becom^e ministro 
general de Indias upon the death of Arriaga, of measures that 
had been taken in vicAv of the filling in of San Bias. The nearby 
ports of Chacala and Matanchel had been explored, and there was 
something to be said in favor of moving the department to one 
or the other. Barring urgent necessity, however, no such course 
should be taken, for if discoveries in tlie northwest were to be 
continued, either San Francisco, Alta California, or Trinidad, 
Guatemala, would be a better site for a marine department. ^^ 
Galvez's reply of January 9, 1777, gave orders to continue the 
department at San Bias until its port should become wholly use- 
less, and then to move it temporarily to Acapulco. Ultimately, it 
might be established in some good port of Alta California. ^^ 
iSTone of these plans for a change of site matured. 

"Bucarely to Arriaga, May 27. 1775. A. G. I., 104-0-16. 
i^A. G. I., 104-6-16. 
"A. G. L, 104-6-17. 
"Ibid. 

"A. G. T... 104-5-24. Trinidad was suggested, it would seem, because 
more accessible by land from the Atlantic coast than was San Bias. 
^"A. G. I., 104-5-24. 



266 The Southwestern Hidorical Quarterly 

One of the greatest difficulties, that the department had to cn- 
connter arose from lack of boats enough with which to carry on 
its duties, despite the fact that there were five boats in the de- 
partment in 1776. Several factors arose in that year to com- 
plicate this problem. Orders had been received for fresh voy- 
ages of discovery to the northwest to be made in the year 1777; 
Alta California had developed to such a point that more supplies 
were needed than formerly; and finalh', Bucarely's fiscal. Areche, 
had been named visitador to Peru, and must needs have a ship 
for the journey to Peru. As the writer has already indicated in 
a former article much that was done to solve this question/^ little 
need be added here. Bucarely recommended that two new frigates 
be built in Peru.-^ Galvez informed Bucarely, December 24, 
1776, that he approved of the suggestion,^^ and on the same day 
gave orders to the viceroy of Peru to construct promptly two good 
frigates for use in explorations.^^ The chance arrival of a mer- 
chant ship at Acapulco permitted of Areche's going to Peru in 
that. Bucarely wrote to Galvez, December 27, 1776, that he was 
also sending Bodega, a naval officer of San Bias, to Peru to see 
if he might purchase a frigate there.-'* Galvez approved,^^ and 
gave orders to the viceroy of Peru that only one frigate needed to 
be built for Bucarely, if Bodega should succeed in purchasing a 
frigate.^^ This matter need not be pursued. The voyages of 
exploration were officially postponed to December, 1778. One 
boat was procured in Pern, and another built at San Bias, and 
they left San Bias for the northwest coast in February, 1779. 

It may be wondered why the ships were not built at San Bias 
in the first place. One reason why they were not was the inability 
of the department to procure ordinary manufactured articles of 
which it stood in need, such as iron, tools, artillerj^, canvas, and 
tackle. In a letter of August 27, 1775, Bucarely asked of Arriaga 
that a supply of iron and tools be shipped from Spain to Vera Cruz 

^"Article cited in note 1, at pp. 191-94. 

^Bucarely to Galvez, Sept. 26, 1776. A. G. I., 104-6-17. 

"A. G. I., 104-6-17. 

"-^Ibid. 

-'A. G. I., 104-6-18. 

"Galvez to Bucarely, March 19, 1777. A. G. I., 104-6-18. 

-"Gjilvez to the viceroy of Peru, March 19, 1777. A. G. I., 104-6-18. 



• Maintaining the Department of San Bias, 1775-1777 267 

for uee at San Bias. He had already asked for a supply of the 
other effects from Havana, he said.^' In a letter of September 26 
he asked for 2,500 binding plates (planchuekis) for use in making 
water-barrels for the San Bias ships. ^® Grimaldi, acting for Ar- 
riaga, who was sick, gave orders that the iron and other effects 
from Spain be assembled at Cadiz for shipment to Vera CriTZ,^^ 
and that the materials sought from Havana be shipped from 
there as soon as possible. ^° On the same day, December 22, 1775, 
he wrote to Bucarely reciting what he had done.^^ There was a 
comparatively prompt response to the orders as regards effects 
sought in Spain. On April 9, 1776, Euiz informed Galvez that 
they had been sent to Vera Cruz.^- Articles sought in Havana, 
however, were not forthcoming. On October 21, 1776, Bonet, the 
naval commander at Havana, wrote to Caste j on, of the ministry 
of marine in Spain, that it was in the interests of the service that 
the effects desired for San Bias be procured in Peru rather than 
at Havana. -^'^ Castejon addressed Galvez about the matter on 
December 31,^* and the latter wrote to Bucarely^^ and to the vice- 
roy of Peru"*' on January 4, 1777, to see if they might arrange 
as Bonet had suggested. Bucarely replied, April 26, 1777, that 
he had written to the viceroy of Peru, remarking also that it 
would be less expensive if the goods could be procured in that vice- 
royalty.^^ jSTearly two years had passed since he first asked for 
them, and they seemed to be no nearer arrival than ever. 

Added to these other lacks at San Bias that have been mentioned, 
there was also a lack of the men required for operation of the 
department. A letter from two officers of San Bias, Diego Cho- 
quet de la Isla and Juan de la Bodega y Cuadra, to Antonio 
Eeggio of Isla de Leon, Spain, dated February 13, 1775, recited 
some of the needs of San Bias in this respect, telling also of the 

-'A. C4. I., 104-6-17. He enclosed a detailed list of the effects needed. 

='A. G. I., 104-6-17. 

-'Grimaldi to Felipe Ruiz, Dec. 22, 1775. A. G. I., 104-6-17. 

'"Grimaldi to Macuriges, Dec. 22, 1775. A. G. I., 104-6-17. 

^'A. G. I., 104-6-17. 

'"-Ibid. 

''A. G. I., 104-6-18. 

''Ibid. "^Ibid. 

'"Ibid. 

'UUd. 



268 The Southivestcrn Historical Quarterly 

nnhealtlifiiliiess of llie site and disordeiiiness of ships' crews.-" 
The letter was forwarded to Arriaga/'^^ who wrote to Biicarely on 
Xovember 3, 1?75, requiring him to provide San Bias with a 
surgeon and a chaplain, both of which were lacking at the time, 
and to send soldiers enough to compel crews to observe a proper 
respect for authority.'^^ In a letter of February 25, l'?76, Bu- 
careiy spoke of a need for carpenters, pilots, and a calker at San 
Blas.*^ Galvez seems to have taken uj^ the matter with Castejon, 
for the latter wrote to him on June 14 that two pilots, two car- 
penters, and one calker would be supplied for use at San Blas.*- 
Francisco Manxon of the Casa de Contratacion wrote to Galvez' 
from Cadiz on July 5 tha.t he was awaiting orders to send the 
calker and carpenters, but that the two pilots had not yet put in 
an appearance.*^ Galvez replied, July 12, that these men and 
the pilots should be sent at government expense on the first boat 
from Cadiz,** and on the same day he wrote to Bucarely of the 
orders that he had given.*^ 

It had been contemplated that boats for the department should 
be built in the shipyard of San Bias itself. If there were to be 
boats, however, there had to be men who knew how to build them. 
Bucarely wrote to Galvez on ISTovember 26, 1776, stating that a 
shipbuilder, boatswain, and other shipyard employees were needed 
at San Bias. He was seeking a builder in Havana, but wanted 
one from Spain if he could not get one in Cuba.**' On December 
27, he wrote that Goya of San Bias had asked for eighty sailors, 
two boatswains, twelve shipyard employees, four phlebotomists, 
two light-tenders (faroleros) ^ and two armorers. Bucarely had 
ordered fift}^ sailors, a boatswain, and twelve shipyard employees 
sent there, and had told Goya to try in future to recruit men 
from the neighborhood.*^ By February 24 he was able to inform 

=»Eeggio to Arriaga, Sept. 26, 1775. A. G. I., 104-6-18. 
^^A. G. I., 104-6-18. 
^^A. G. I., 104-6-17. 
"^Ibid. 

^lUd. 

^UUd. 

^'A. G. I., 104-6-18. 

^UUd. 



Maintaming the Department of San Bias, 1775-1777 269 

Gcilvez that he had procured twelve shipyard employees in Vera 
Cruz.'*^ Bonet was unable to find a ship-builder in Havana,*^ 
but Galvez wrote to Bucarely on February 15 that a ship-builder 
would be siipplied.^'' He took the matter up with Castejon, who 
replied on April 20 that Jose Ghenard had been designated to go," 
and Galvez sent a letter next day to Bucarely to that effect. ^^ 
Bucarely wrote at length, May 27, 177i7, reiterating the need for 
a ship-builder,^^ for it was not until July that he learned of the 
destination of Chenard.^* Ghenard did not go to Mexico, how- 
ever. On October 22 Gastejon informed Galvez that Ghenard was 
unable to go, and asked if there was still need for a ship-builder 
at San Blas.-'^^ Galvez replied on October 27 that the king de- 
sired that such a man be sent,^^ whereupon Gastejon notified 
Galvez on November 22 that Francisco Segurola had been appointed 
to go.°'^ Galvez sent word to Bucarely to that effect the follow- 
ing day,^"'^ giving orders at the same time to one Francisco Eabago 
of Goruiia to send Segurola by the next boat.^^ This arrangement 
did not please Segurola, who wrote to Galvez on the 30th that his 
precipitate departure would compel him to abandon his family.®" 
Segurola^'s washes seem not to have been considered, however, for 
we find a petition of Antonio de la Guesta, dated December 13, 
1777, asking that Segurola's son Eamon be allowed to take the 
next boat to Havana, so as to join his father there,®^ a request 
which was granted through Galvez's letter of the 23d to Eabago.®^ 
The above review is enough to give an idea of the difficulties 

^"Bonet to Galvez, Jan. 31, 1777. A. G. I., 104-6-18. 
'"A. G. I., 104-6-18. 

'-Hid. 

'UUd. 

=^Bucare]y to Gitlvez, July 27, 1777. A. G. I., 104-6-18. 

''A. G. I., 104-6-18. 

"■"Hid. 

""lUd. 

''Ibid. 

''Ibid. 

'"'Ibid. 

''Ibid. 

"-Ibid. 



270 The SoutlLivestern Jlisiorical Quarterly 

experienced by the Department of San Bias. Bucarely did all 
that he could to repair the deficiencies, but delays were nnavoid- 
able, for the things wanted were not always at hand or readily 
assembled. Yet with this lame equipment he had been able to 
sustain and develop the Californias and to canry on the exploring 
voyages to the northwest coasts. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



015 829 907 < 



